The Qualitative Report The Qualitative Report

Volume 24 Number 10 Article 9

10-20-2019

Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of

Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two

Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process

Michael E. Kalu School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton Ontario, Canada, kalum@mcmaster.ca

Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr

Part of the Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons, and the

Rehabilitation and Therapy Commons

Recommended APA Citation Recommended APA Citation Kalu, M. E. (2019). Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process. The Qualitative Report, 24(10), 2524-2535. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.4082

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Qualitative Report at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Qualitative Report by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact nsuworks@nova.edu.

Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–Context (EPPiC) Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process Reflective Process

Abstract Abstract A satisfactory research question often signifies the beginning point for many researchers. While this can be true for quantitative studies because of pre-defined research questions, qualitative research questions undergo series of revisions through a reflective process. This reflective process provides the framework for the subjectivity associated with qualitative inquiry. The continuous iterative reflective process is an essential component for developing qualitative research questions that correspond with the various qualitative study designs. Although qualitative inquiry is term exclusively subjective, there is a need to use a framework in developing qualitative research questions. The Emphasis- Purposeful sampling- Phenomenon of interest – Context (EPPiC) framework guides qualitative researchers in developing and revising qualitative research questions to suit a specific qualitative approach. This article addresses both the development of a research question using the “EPPiC framework” and demonstrate how to revise the “developed” research question to reflect two qualitative research design. I developed a qualitative research question for Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description design using the EPPiC Framework and subsequently revised the research question to suit a grounded theory design.

Keywords Keywords Qualitative Inquiries, Reflexivity, Research Questions, EPPiC Framework, Interpretive Description, Grounded Theory

Creative Commons License Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.

Acknowledgements Acknowledgements I want to acknowledge Dr. Susan Jack and Dr. Vanina Dal Bello-Haas for their mentorship during the period I wrote this manuscript. I would also want to thank the members of the Emerging Researchers and Professional in Ageing- African Network for their contribution in revising this manuscript.

This article is available in The Qualitative Report: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol24/iss10/9

The Qualitative Report 2019 Volume 24, Number 10, Article 6, 2524-2535

Using Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of Interest–

Context (EPPiC) Framework to Reflect on Two Qualitative

Research Designs and Questions: A Reflective Process

Michael E. Kalu McMaster University, Hamilton Ontario, Canada

A satisfactory research question often signifies the beginning point for many

researchers. While this can be true for quantitative studies because of pre-

defined research questions, qualitative research questions undergo series of

revisions through a reflective process. This reflective process provides the

framework for the subjectivity associated with qualitative inquiry. The

continuous iterative reflective process is an essential component for developing

qualitative research questions that correspond with the various qualitative

study designs. Although qualitative inquiry is term exclusively subjective, there

is a need to use a framework in developing qualitative research questions. The

Emphasis- Purposeful sampling- Phenomenon of interest – Context (EPPiC)

framework guides qualitative researchers in developing and revising qualitative

research questions to suit a specific qualitative approach. This article addresses

both the development of a research question using the “EPPiC framework” and

demonstrate how to revise the “developed” research question to reflect two

qualitative research design. I developed a qualitative research question for

Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description design using the EPPiC Framework

and subsequently revised the research question to suit a grounded theory

design. Keywords: Qualitative Inquiries, Reflexivity, Research Questions,

EPPiC Framework, Interpretive Description, Grounded Theory

Introduction

While quantitative research questions are often developed and finalized at the beginning

of the research, qualitative research questions are constantly revised throughout the research

process (Berger, 2015; Gentles, Charles, Ploeg, & McKibbon, 2014). The initial research

questions are often borne out of the desire of the researcher to understand the experiences and

perceptions of individuals concerning a phenomenon under study. Experiences and perceptions

are better understood through a subjective inquiry of the qualitative methods. Since the

individual experiences of a phenomenon evolve over time, it is important that qualitative

researchers incorporate an ongoing process of questioning and revising the research questions

to capture the changes in the social interactions (Agee, 2009). In addition, qualitative

researchers revised their initial questions through the process of reflexivity, which is described

as the process researchers examine their own roles and perspectives in the inquiry process

(Gentles, Jack, Nicholas, & McKibbon, 2014).

Recently, participants’ involvement in research has been encouraged, hence

participants are sometimes invited to collaborate in developing research questions relevant to

their needs (Agee, 2009). Given this development, constant revision of research questions

between researchers and participants are inevitable because this process creates stronger and

pragmatic research questions. Revising a qualitative research question does not only provide

pragmatic questions, it also increases the credibility, interpretability and applicability of the

research findings in a different context. The revision of qualitative research questions and

documenting the process provides a degree of trust for users and other researchers in a different

Michael E. Kalu 2525

context. It also provides that audit trail process that could enable other readers to interpret

qualitative research findings relative to their context. When revising a qualitative research

question, researchers should ensure that every revision reflects the core elements and coded

language of a particular qualitative research paradigm (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Therefore, this

reflective article demonstrates how to revise a research question to reflect two qualitative

research designs. In the first section, I provided a background and rationale to a hypothetical

research area. In the second section, I demonstrated how to use the Emphasis-Purposeful

Sampling-Phenomenon of interest–Context (EPPiC) framework to reflect the core elements

and coded language for developing qualitative research questions, selecting an appropriate

qualitative research design and sampling techniques. In the third section, I revised the research

question stated in section two to suit another qualitative research design, describing the design

and the appropriate sampling techniques supporting my decision with evidence from the

literature.

Background and Rationale to Physiotherapist Role in Care Transition for Older Adult

with Hip Fracture

Population aging is an emerging demographic shift across the globe, and this shift is

more prominent in industrialized nations like Canada, Australia, USA, UK, and Japan

(Anderson & Hussey, 2000). In Canada, there are more people aged 65 years than children

under the age of 15 years (Statistics Canada, 2016), and it is projected that this would increase

by 42% in 2020 (Anderson & Hussey, 2000). Consequently, conditions associated with old age

including hip fracture, stroke, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and dementia, are also likely

to increase in prevalence (Reinhardt, 2003).

Hip fractures are projected to be a worldwide health problem in the near future (Auais,

Morin, Nadeau, & Finch, 2013; Morin, Lix, Majumdar, & Lesile, 2013). Worldwide, the

estimated number of hip fractures is expected to reach 6.3 million in 2050 (Cooper & Baker,

1995). In Canada alone, almost 30,000 hip fractures occur each year, and by 2041, this number

is expected to exceed 88,000 (Leslie et al., 2009). This increase has associated high healthcare

cost to the Canadian government (Leslie et al., 2009). A 2012 Canadian study estimated the

average direct attributable cost in the first year after hip fractures to be $36,929 in women and

$39,479 in men. This translates into $1.1 billion spent by health systems in Canada on hip

fracture patients during the first year alone. For those who survive the first year, costs remain

high into the second year ($9,017 for women, $10,347 for men; Morin et al., 2012).

The majority of older people who survive a hip fracture have residual mobility

disabilities (Shumway-Cook, Ciol, Gruber, & Robinson, 2005). Often, these residual mobility

disabilities are not accounted for during transition of care from one setting to another (Penrod

et al., 2004). For instance, Polnaszek et al. (2015) reported that physiotherapy

recommendations were completely omitted in 53% (322/611) and partially omitted in 47%

(286/611) of patients; less than 1% (3/611) of patients had no omissions in the discharge

summaries. These omissions are related to mobility issues such as level of assistance with

sitting and standing and omission in medical devices recommendation. Similarly, Thomas et

al. (2010), in an observational study reported that walking aid use after discharge following hip

fracture is rarely reviewed and often inappropriately reported. Arguably, lack of explicit or

active role of physiotherapists during care transition among older adults with hip fracture could

be the reason for this significant omission (Kalu, Maximos, Sengiad, & Dal Bello-Haas, 2019).

Therefore, understanding the role of physiotherapists in enhancing mobility for older adult

during care transition is warranted.

2526 The Qualitative Report 2019

The Emphasis-Purposeful Sampling-Phenomenon of interest–Context (EPPiC)

Framework

The EPPiC framework guides the development of qualitative research questions (Jack,

Campbell, Landeen, & Strachan, 2019). Prior to developing research questions, it is often

advisable to state a broad study aim which can be redefined through a reflexive process (Agee,

2009). Therefore, the board study aim used in this article was: To understand and describe how

physiotherapists enhance mobility for older adults.

The E-Emphasis

The E-Emphasis component of the framework often guides the choice of the coded

languages appropriate for the different type of qualitative designs (Jack et al., 2019). Table 1

shows examples of “coded languages” for six selected qualitative research design. Based on

the purpose stated above, the emphasis of my proposed study was “to explore and understand.”

Table 1. Shows Emphasis-Purposeful-Phenomenon of interest- Context (EPPiC) coded languages for six selected

qualitative designs

Qualitative

design

Emphasis Purposeful

sampling

Phenomenon

of interest

Example of a research statement

Qualitative

description

To describe,

identify

Heterogenous

sampling

Uptake and

delivery

What factors influence the access of

primary healthcare services for older

adults living with cerebral palsy in three

provinces in Canada?

Interpretive

description

To describe,

understand

Maximum

variations

Clinical

problems

How do healthcare workers working in

the rural communities provide health and

social service information to older adults

living with cerebral palsy?

Phenomenology To described lived

experience

(descriptive) or

meaning of lived

experience

(interpretive)

Homogenous

sampling

Experience Among older adults (>65years) living

with cerebral palsy, what is the meaning

of living alone in an independent

housing? (Interpretive)

What is the lived experience of older

adult living with cerebral palsy when

transitioning from home in the

community to a long-term care facility?

(Descriptive)

Grounded

theory

To understand,

explain “process”-

social &

psychological

process

Theoretical

sampling

Process What psychological process explains

how older adults living with cerebral

palsy, residing in rural communities in

Ontario, make choice of a long-term care

facility?

Case study

To describe,

explore, explain,

understand

Extreme,

typical &

critical case

Update,

delivery of

implementati

on

How does the Slow-Stream-Transition

Program facilitate the smooth transition

of older adult living with cerebral palsy

from their home into a long-term care

facility?

Ethnography To explore,

describe &

explain culture

context or social

structures

Extreme,

typical &

critical case

Values,

beliefs,

culture

What are the shared beliefs and health

practices of older adults living with

cerebral palsy in a long-term care

facility?

Adapted from Jack et al. (2019). Examples of context include, population-based context, geographical (e.g.,

location), political (e.g., World War II or during new policy), economic (e.g., poverty), socio-cultural (e.g.,

marriage rites, clothing styles, kinship practice).

Michael E. Kalu 2527

P-Purposeful Sampling

P-purposeful sampling is often the sampling choice used in a qualitative study. A

researcher should not only state the population to be sampled but should clearly state certain

characteristics of the sampled population. For instance: How do physiotherapists enhance

mobility for older adults?

This sampling may seem purposive, but it did not provide the characteristics of the

physiotherapists and the older adults to be involved in this study. For instance, the

physiotherapy profession has several specialties including orthopedic, sports, women health,

geriatrics and so on. Therefore, clearly stating the characteristics of the physiotherapists to be

sampled would enhance interpretation and applicability. I revised the question to accommodate

the physiotherapists’ characteristics: How do geriatric physiotherapists enhance mobility for

older adults?

Also, owing to the heterogenous nature of older adults’ illness characteristics,

trajectories and pattern, it will be clearer to describe the characteristics of the older adults in

the research question. This reflexive process is important because qualitative evidence aimed

to provide in-depth evidence while being specific to the population characteristics would

provide information for the application of the findings of such a study in a similar context.

Therefore, I revised the research question to: How do geriatric physiotherapists enhance

mobility for older adults ( 65 years) with hip fracture?

With this revised research question, it was clear that I will sample geriatric

physiotherapists and older ( 65 years) adults with hip fracture. Typically, the purposeful

sampling could be any of the strategies including, criterion, extreme/deviant case/ intensity,

homogeneous, typical case (Patton, 2015. Notably, these sampling strategies must best suit a

particular qualitative design. For example, in a phenomenological study, it is always advised

to choose a homogenous sampling to understand the meaning the participants give to their lived

experience. You can choose to study a typical case or extreme sampling in a case study design.

The choice of the type of the purposive sampling depends on the aim of study. For a detailed

explanation see Patton (2015).

The Pi- Phenomenon of Interest

The Pi-Phenomenon of Interest describes the incident, activities, process, values,

perceptions, attitude, beliefs and experiences of health, illness, healthcare treatment, program,

service (Jack et al., 2019). A qualitative research question must contain the phenomenon of

interest. The phrase “how do” in the last revised research question provided an idea of the

phenomena of interest. The phrase “how do” asked the question of “ in what means or method”

an activity or event is performed based on the participants’ experiences. Often times the

phenomenon of interest could be related to the emphasis on the EPPiC framework (Jack et al.,

2019). Using the initial study aim: to understand and describe (emphasis) the activities or

process (phenomenon of interest) by which physiotherapist enhance mobility for older adults.

The C-Context

The C-Context as defined in the Oxford dictionary, refers to statements, ideas, or

entities that surround an event and provides resources for its appropriate interpretation and/or

clarification. In a qualitative inquiry, the context influences the experiences of a phenomenon

and provide insights into the interpretation of the experiences. In the sample provided above, I

can choose to link the context to the purposive sample (population-based context) or clearly

state the context as geographical (e.g., location), political (e.g., World War II or during new

2528 The Qualitative Report 2019

policy), economic (e.g., poverty), socio-cultural (e.g., marriage rites, clothing styles, kinship

practice). If I choose to link my context to sampling, the research question could be revised to:

How do geriatric physiotherapists working in the in-patient rehabilitation units enhance

mobility for older adults with hip fracture? On the other hand, if I choose to describe a

geographical context, the research question could be revised to: How do geriatric

physiotherapists working in inpatient rehabilitation unit enhance mobility for older adults with

hip fracture transitioning from hospital to their home in the community?

While a researcher is allowed to decide on whether the context should link to sampling,

geographical, political, economic, or socio-cultural context depends on several factors

including the overall aim of the study, the philosophical paradigm of the research. For instance,

while an ethnographic researcher may focus more on the geographical and political context

than context relating to sampling, a global health policy researcher may focus more on

economic context and political context than geographical.

Through iterative reflexive process, I noticed my professional perceptions, values and

assumption as a physiotherapist, which I called my subjective I “profession-advocates”

influenced my research question (Kalu, 2019; Peshkin, 1988). The current research question-

how do geriatric physiotherapists working in inpatient rehabilitation unit enhance mobility for

older adults with hip fracture transitioning from hospital to the home in the community?- may

not provide the information for physiotherapists’ role in enhancing mobility during care

transition. Therefore, I revised my research question to reflect my assumptions: How do

physiotherapists, working within geriatric in-patient rehabilitation units, prepare older adults

( 65 years) with hip fracture for transfer to their home in the community? The above research

question has coded languages for Interpretive Description methodology (Thorne, 2016). While

this is the starting question in this article, the research question would be iteratively revised.

Throughout this article, in-patient rehabilitation unit would be referred to as inpatient rehab.

Research Question for Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description Design

How do physiotherapists, working within geriatric inpatient rehabilitation units,

prepare older adults ( 65 years) with hip fracture for transfer to their home in the community?

With the stated research question above, I intend to use Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description

(ID) methodology because it is an inductive method that provides an integrative description of

a phenomenon through the lens of the researcher’s professional philosophical practice (Thorne,

2016). ID methodology was originally developed by nursing scholars as an alternative

qualitative methodology for generating applied knowledge for solving clinical problems which

are often characterized by human health and illness experiences (Thorne, Kirkham, &

Macdonlad-Emes, 1997). However, the ID methodology is now being used by other health

applied disciplines because it allows for disciplinary focused questions with the aim of solving

a clinical problem (Thorne, 2016). The ID methodology places emphasis on its ability to

answer clinically based research questions through the lens of researchers professional

philosophical practice principles, and also its capacity to yield practical solutions for easy

applicability in the research context (Thorne, 2016).

I perceive the appropriateness of the ID methodology in my study in four ways. First,

my research is an identified clinical problem that has not been adequately studied (Thorne,

2016). This is an identified clinical problem because previous quantitative findings have shown

that despite innovative mobility enhancement strategies, older adults experience decline in

mobility when discharged to their home (Chase, Lozano, Hanlon, & Bowles, 2018; Rantanen,

2013; Webber & St. John, 2017). Along with the complex nature of mobility (WHO, 2001),

and the desire to understand empirical evidence of the quantitative findings (Creswell & Poth,

2018), ID is appropriate for my study. Second, ID is appropriate for my study because it is a

Michael E. Kalu 2529

practice, goal-oriented methodology that could provide insight and understanding of the

relationships and patterns associated with the decline in mobility as older adults with hip

fracture move from inpatient rehabilitation to their home (Thorne, 2016). Third, ID’s flexible

approach to borrow methodologies from other qualitative methodologies offers a coherent

strategy to conceive, design and implement research capable of solving clinical problems

(Hunt, 2009; Thorne, Kirkham, & O’Flynn-Magee, 2004;). This flexibility helps to identify

themes and patterns that will inform clinical understanding building on the researcher and

object of study relatedness (Thorne et al.,1997; Thorne et al., 2004). Finally, ID allows me to

explore my research using both the theoretical and disciplinary orientation of my profession.

The recent theoretical orientation in the physiotherapy profession is the holistic approach of

using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, specifically, the

biopsychosocial model of illness approach to understanding or solving any health challenge

(World Confederation for Physical Therapy, 2018). This holistic approach builds on the core

disciplinary principle of physiotherapy practice which centers on functional ability of patients.

In my study, I will explore “the preparation experience” of the physiotherapists by focusing on

preparation targeted towards improving mobility (functional improvement) of older adults with

hip fracture and mobility issue. The disciplinary orientation of physiotherapy practice would

give me the lens to interpret and provide a practical recommendation for solving the problem

of mobility decline during care transitions, a core feature of ID.

Purposeful Sampling for Sally Thorne’s Interpretive Description

Purpose sampling is a general approach to sampling in a qualitative inquiry that aims

to identify participants who share the same experience of a central phenomenon of study

(Patton, 2015; Thorne, 2016). Thus, this sampling procedure allows me to identify individual

participant experiences that would contribute to the shared understanding of physiotherapy

experience in preparing older adults with hip fracture and mobility issue for transition to their

home in the community. I would employ criterion and theoretical sampling in recruiting

participants (Thorne, 2016). Criterion sampling would be used for initial interviews followed

by theoretical sampling (Matthew-Maich, Ploeg Jack, & Dobbins, 2013):

1. Criterion sampling: Participants would be invited to participate in the study if

they meet the following criteria; (a) a licensed physiotherapist with a minimum

of 5 years’ experience in the geriatric in-patient rehab in a hospital in Ontario,

Canada (Ajjawi & Higgs, 2007); (b) self-identified as having worked as an

active member of a home discharge team for older adults with hip fracture and

mobility issue; (c) employed full time and (d) proficient in English language.

These criteria are to ensure that physiotherapists who have relevant experience

in preparing older adults with hip fracture and mobility issues were captured

(Creswell, 2007).

2. Theoretical sampling: Thorne (2016) suggested theoretical sampling for ID

because this sampling strategy helps to build evolving theoretical variations that

develop a more complex interpretation of patterns that provides a practical

solution to the clinical problem studied. Theoretical sampling entails concurrent

collection and analysis of data, and subsequent seeking maximum variation in

the findings to provide a better understanding of emerging themes (Strauss &

Corbin, 1994). I will focus my initial interviews among participants that met the

above mention criteria. Subsequently, I would use geographical location (urban

or rural) of the hospital in Ontario, physiotherapists’ role (e.g., line management

2530 The Qualitative Report 2019

and management role) and characteristic of mobility issue to find maximal

variation during data collection and analysis. It is also possible I will sample

case note and conduct participant observation as a method of data collection in

this study.

Research Question for Grounded Theory

Typically, preparing older adults after hip surgery for transfer to another care setting is

predominantly a nurse’s role (Glenny, Stolee, Sheiban, & Jaglal, 2013), but because of the

increasingly mobility problem associated with this category of older adults (Rantanen, 2013),

it is possible that physiotherapists would occasionally be involved during the transfer process

to enhance mobility. Therefore, it is important to understand how experienced physiotherapist

transfer older adults with hip fracture and mobility issues from inpatient rehab to their home in

the community. Therefore, the purpose of this study is: To develop a psychosocial

understanding in the form of a substantive theory that explains how physiotherapists’ in the

in-patient rehabilitation unit prepare older adults with hip fracture and mobility issues for

transfer to their home in the community. The purpose of the study has been changed from the

purpose stated earlier in this article: To describe and explore how physiotherapists enhance

mobility for older adults, therefore, the E-Emphasis on the present study focuses on explaining

rather than exploring or describing stated earlier for ID as the research design. The ID would

not be able to explain the various variations and connections throughout the preparation process

in details (Thorne et al., 2004). Therefore, it is evident that the change is reflected in the

research question (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The revised research question 2 is: What

psychosocial process explains how physiotherapists in the inpatient rehabilitation unit prepare

older adults with hip fracture and mobility issues for transfer to their home in the community?

Table 2 shows the first research question and second research question using the EPPiC

framework.

Table 2. Differences between the first research question and the second question using EPPiC framework

EPPiC First Question Revised Question 1(ID) Question 2 (GT)

E Description and exploration

“How do”.

Description and exploration-

“How do”….

Explanation- “what is” and

how PTs”

P Physiotherapist Physiotherapist in in-patient

rehabilitation

Physiotherapist in in-patient

rehabilitation

Pi Mobility enhancement for

older adults

Preparing older adults with hip

fracture and mobility issue for

transfer

Preparing older adults with

hip fracture and mobility

issue for transfer

C Inpatient rehabilitation to

community

In-patient rehabilitation to older

adult’s home in the community.

In-patient rehabilitation to

older adult’s home in the

community

E-Emphasis, P-Purposeful sampling, Pi-Phenomena of interest, C-context, ID- Interpretive description, GT-

Grounded theory, PTs- Physiotherapist

I would employ grounded theory (GT), adapting the constructivist approach to

inductively generate a theory based on symbolic interactionism (Charmaz, 2006; Matthew-

Maich et al., 2013). This approach is appropriate because of its evolving nature that allows

flexibility in understanding the stages (causes/strategies) and variations (conditions/context)

of actions across participants’ experience of the phenomena (core phenomena) (Corbin, 2009;

Gentiles, 2015). More importantly, GT is suitable for studying individual process, interpersonal

relationship and reciprocal effects between individuals and social process (Charmaz, 2006;

Corbin & Straus, 2008; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). For instance, this method allows me to study

the psychosocial processes including personal experience, emotion, prejudice and interpersonal

Michael E. Kalu 2531

and inter-professional collaborations of physiotherapists in transferring older adults with hip

fracture and mobility to their home. I choose Charmaz (2006) approach over Glaser (1978) and

Strauss and Corbin (1990) approach because Charmaz approach embraces constructivism.

While Strauss and Corbin (1990) approach GT through both constructivism and post

positivism, Glaser (1978) focuses more on post-positivism approach. The constructivism

approach paradigm of inquiry allows me to understand the social reality of the physiotherapists

experience while acknowledging group constructs of socially shared meaning (Guba &

Lincoln, 1994; Charmaz, 2006). The symbolic interactionism process allows me to apply the

principle of reflexivity while allowing the participants experiences to shape the direction and

form of the research (Snow, 2001).

Purposeful Sampling for Grounded Theory

I would employ purposive criterion based and maximum variation sampling for my

initial sampling followed by theoretical sampling (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2015).

The criteria for selection, phenomenal and demographic variations have been described in the

first section of this article. However, some criteria listed might be relaxed during the theoretical

sampling process in order to allow for complete development of emerging theory (Charmaz,

2006). The major difference between theoretical sampling in ID and GT is that ID does not

follow the “classical” theoretical sampling process but borrows some concept that allows the

researcher to answer the clinical problem identified (Thorne, 2016). On the other hand,

theoretical sampling in GT follows the classical process described by Glaser and Strauss,

(1967), although with modifications to allow for flexibility (Charmaz, 2014). For instance,

theoretical saturation and constant comparative method of data analysis was not emphasized or

have different meanings in ID and GT (Charmaz, 2014; Creswell & Poth, 2018). Saturation is

reached in GT when all concept in the substantive theory developed are understood and can be

substantiated from the data (Charmaz, 2006).

Another key concept identified by Charmaz (2014) was that theoretical sampling is not

solely sampling to reflect population distributions, finding negative cases and sampling until

no new data emerged, rather purposively seeking data that provides a useful analytic

understanding of categories and links surrounding the core phenomena. The hallmark of

theoretical sampling in GT is to provide more concrete explanation to the categories during

theory development (Draucker, Martsolf, Ross, & Rusk, 2007). According to Charmaz (2014),

theoretical sampling strategies include (a) conducting initial interviews and identifying

categories; (b) using memos to start theoretical sampling to develop properties of categories

and its range of variation; and (c) applying doubt abductive reasoning process, which allows

the researcher to doubt the “may be” idea during memoing (Hanse, 2007; Kelle, 2014). This

“may be” often comes through an iterative reflexive process throughout the research process.

Conclusion

This article has provided an example on how to develop and revise research questions

with a coded language appropriate to a specific qualitative study design (Figure 1), sampling

techniques, strategies and sample size. The two research designs I discussed in this article were

interpretive description and grounded theory. While this article is a reflexive experience in

conducting qualitative research, it has provided a framework for early qualitative researchers

to reflexively revise their research question to suit the specific qualitative study design of

choice.

2532 The Qualitative Report 2019

Figure 1 shows the first question, revised questions for interpretive description [ID] and

grounded theory [GT] qualitative design.

References

Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process. International

Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 22(4), 431-447.

Ajjawi, R., & Higgs, J. (2007). Using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate how

experienced practitioners learn to communicate clinical reasoning. The Qualitative

Report, 12(4), 612-638. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol12/iss4/6

Anderson, G. F., & Hussey, P. S. (2000). Population aging: A comparison among industrialized

countries. Health Affairs, 19(3), 191-203.

Auais, M., Morin S., Nadeau, L., & Finch, L. N. (2013). Changes in frailty-related

characteristics of the hip fracture population and their implications for healthcare

services: Evidence from Quebec, Canada. Osteoporosis International, 24(10), 2713-

2724.

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and

implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.

Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol13/iss4/2

Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative

research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219-234.

Charmaz, K. C. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative

Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Charmaz, K. C. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chase, J., Lozano, D. A., Hanlon, A., & Bowles, K. H. (2018). Identifying factors associated

with mobility decline among hospitalized older adults. Clinical Nursing Research,

27(1), 81-104.

Cooper, C., & Baker, D. J. (1995). Risk factors for hip fracture. New England Journal of

Medicine, 332(12), 814-815.

Michael E. Kalu 2533

Corbin, J. (2009). Taking an analytic journey. In J. M. Morse, P. Noerager Stern, J. Corbin, B.

Bowers, K. Charmaz, & A. E. Clarke (Eds.), Developing grounded theory: The second

generation (pp. 35-54). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures

for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures

for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among

five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Draucker, C. B., Martsolf, D. S., Ross, R., & Rusk, T. B. (2007). Theoretical sampling and

category development in grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1137-

1148.

Gentles, S. J., Charles, C., Ploeg, J., & McKibbon, A. K. (2015). Sampling in qualitative

research: Insights from an overview of the methods literature. The Qualitative Report,

20(11)1772-1789. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss11/5

Gentles, S. J., Jack, S. M., Nicholas, D. B., & McKibbon K. A. (2014). Critical approach to

reflexivity in grounded theory. The Qualitative Report, 19(44) 1-14. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol19/iss44/3

Glaser, B. G. (1978). Advances in the methodology of grounded theory: Theoretical sensitivity.

Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Glenny, C., Stolee, P., Sheiban, L., & Jaglal, S. (2013). Communicating during care transition

for older hip fracture patients: Family caregiver and healthcare providers’ perspectives.

International Journal of Integrated Care, 13, e044.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K.

Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (1st ed., pp. 105-117).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hunt, M. (2009). Strengths and challenges in the use of interpretive description: Reflections

arising from a study of the moral experience of health professionals in humanitarian

work. Qualitative Health Research, 19(9) 1284-292.

Jack, S. M., Campbell, K., Landeen, J., & Strachan, P. (2019). Development of a focused,

overarching qualitative research study question: Application of the EPPiC framework.

Presented at The Qualitative Report 10th Annual Conference, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

Kalu, M. E. (2019). How does “ Subjective 1” influences a qualitative research question,

theoretical approach and methodologies. Global Journal of Pure and Applied Science,

25, 97-101.

Kalu, M. E., Maximos, M., Sengiad S., & Dal Bello-Haas, V. (2019). The role of rehabilitation

professionals in care transitions for older adults. A scoping review. Physical &

Occupational Therapy in Geriatric, 37(3), 123-150.

Kelle, U. (2014). Theorization from data. In U. Flick (Ed.), The Sage handbook of qualitative

data analysis (pp. 554-568). London, UK: Sage.

Leslie, W. D., O' Donnell, S., Jean, S., Lagace, C. Walsh, P., Bancej, C. . . . Osteoporosis

Surveillance Expert Working Group. (2009). Trends in hip fracture rates in Canada.

The Journal of the American Medical Association, 302(8), 883-889.

Matthew-Maich, N., Ploeg, J., Jack, S., & Dobbins, M. (2013). Leading on the frontlines with

passion and persistence: A necessary condition for breastfeeding best practice guideline

uptake. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 22, 1759-1770.

2534 The Qualitative Report 2019

Morin, S. N., Lix, L. M., Majumdar, S. R., & Leslie, W. D. (2013). eTemporal trends in the

incidence of osteoporotic fractures. Current Osteoporosis Reports, 11(4), 263-269.

Morin, S. N., Lix, L. M., Azimaee, M., Metge, C., Majudar S. R., & Leslie, W. D. (2012).

Institutionalization following incident non-traumatic fractures in community-dwelling

men and women. Osteoporosis International, 23(9), 2381-2386.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Penrod, J. D., Boockvar, K. S., Litke, A., Magazine, J., Hannan, E. L., Halm, A. E. . . . Siu, A.

L. (2004). Physical therapy and mobility 2 and 6 months after hip fracture. Journal of

American Geriatrics Society, 52(7), 1114-120.

Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity-one’s own. Educational Researcher, 1797, 17-

21.

Polnaszek, B., Mirr, J., Roiland, R., Hovanes, M., Gilmore- Bykovski, A., & Kind, A. (2015).

Omission of physical therapy recommendations for high-risk patients transitioning

from the hospital to sub-acute care facilities. Journal of the American Geriatrics

Society, 63, S127-S128.

Rantanen, T. (2013). Promoting mobility in older people. Journal of Preventive Medicine &

Public Health, 46(1), 50-54.

Reinhardt, U. E. (2003). Does the aging of the population really drive the demand for health

care? Health Affairs, 22(6), 27-39.

Shumway-Cook, A., Ciol, M. A., Gruber, W., & Robinson, C. (2005). Incidence of and risk

factors for falls following hip fracture in community-dwelling older adults. Physical

Therapy, 85, 648-655.

Snow, D. A. (2001). Extending and broadening Blumer's conceptualization of symbolic

interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 24, 367-377.

Statistics Canada. (2016). 2016 Census: Population trends in Canada by age and sex.

Retrieved from https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/sc/video/2016census_agesex

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures

and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J., (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin

& Y. S Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). London, UK:

Sage.

Thomas, S., Halbert, J., Mackintosh, S., Cameron, I. D., Kurrle, S., Whitehead, C., . . . Crotty,

M. (2010). Walking aid use after discharge following hip fracture is rarely reviewed

and often inappropriate: An observational study. Journal of Physiotherapy, 56(4), 267-

72.

Thorne, S. (2016). Interpretive description: Qualitative research for applied practice (2nd ed.).

New York, NY: Routledge.

Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & Macdonald-Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description: A

noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Research in

Nursing & Health, 20, 169-177.

Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & O'Flynn-Magee, K. (2004). The analytic challenge in interpretive

description. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 1-11.

Webber, S., & St. John, P. (2017). Walking patterns in hospital and on discharge from in-

patient geriatric rehabilitation. Poster presented at the 46th Annual Scientific &

Educational Meeting of Canadian Association of Gerontology, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Retrieved from http://cagacg.ca/wp-

content/uploads/2017/10/CAG2017_AbstractBook.pdf

Michael E. Kalu 2535

World Health Organization [WHO]. (2001). International classification of functioning,

disability and health. Retrieved from

http://psychiatr.ru/download/1313?view=name=CF_18.pdf

World Confederation for Physical Therapy. (2018). Policy statement: Principle supporting the

Description of physical therapy. Retrieved from http://www.wcpt.org/policy/ps-

descriptionPT

Author Note

Michael E Kalu is a physiotherapist. At the time of writing this article, he is a Ph.D.

student at the School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University. Correspondence

regarding this article can be addressed directly to: kalum@mcmaster.ca.

I want to acknowledge Dr. Susan Jack and Dr. Vanina Dal Bello-Haas for their

mentorship during the period I wrote this manuscript. I would also want to thank the members

of the Emerging Researchers and Professional in Ageing-African Network for their

contribution in revising this manuscript.

Copyright 2019: Michael E. Kalu and Nova Southeastern University.

Article Citation

Kalu, M. E. (2019). Using emphasis-purposeful sampling-phenomenon of interest–context

(EPPiC) framework to reflect on two qualitative research designs and questions: A

reflective process. The Qualitative Report, 24(10), 2524-2535. Retrieved from

https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol24/iss10/9